Close

    • Motortrend 2013 F10 BMW M5 test numbers are in - 11.9@120 and 4384 pound curb weight

      This is our second set of US performance numbers for the new M5. Car and Driver put up numbers last year and hit 12.0@122. MotorTrend got it into the 11's with a 11.9@120 mph run. Certainly not bad but not exactly blazing performance these days either especially considering MotorTrend hit 12.5@115 in a 6 speed manual previous generation E60 M5. That car was already a heavy 4100 pounds and this new M5 is almost 300 pounds heavier.

      If the M5 did not pick up that 300 pounds on the previous generation we would see much more impressive performance numbers. The CLS63 AMG and E63 AMG with the new twin turbo M157 motor run similar times although they have an optional performance package to up the ante and likely leave the M5 behind. The new M5 is definitely fast, but it also could have raised the bar much higher had it not gained so much weight.


      2013 BMW M5
      POWERTRAIN/CHASSIS
      DRIVETRAIN LAYOUT Front engine, RWD
      ENGINE TYPE Twin-turbo 90-deg V-8, alum block/heads
      VALVETRAIN DOHC, 4 valves/cyl
      DISPLACEMENT 268.2 cu in/4395 cc
      COMPRESSION RATIO 10.0:1
      POWER (SAE NET) 560 hp @ 6000 rpm
      TORQUE (SAE NET) 500 lb-ft @ 1500 rpm
      REDLINE 7200 rpm
      WEIGHT TO POWER 7.8 lb/hp
      TRANSMISSION 7-speed twin-clutch auto
      AXLE/FINAL-DRIVE RATIO 3.15:1/2.12:1
      SUSPENSION, FRONT; REAR Multi-link, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar; multi-link, coil springs, adj shocks, anti-roll bar
      STEERING RATIO 13.1:1
      TURNS LOCK-TO-LOCK 2.5
      BRAKES, F;R 15.7-in vented, drilled disc; 15.6-in vented, drilled disc, ABS
      WHEELS 9.0 x 20-in, 10.0 x 20-in cast aluminum
      TIRES 265/35ZR20 99Y; 295/30ZR20 101Y Michelin Pilot Super Sport
      DIMENSIONS
      WHEELBASE 116.7 in
      TRACK, F/R 64.1/62.3 in
      LENGTH x WIDTH x HEIGHT 193.5 x 74.4 x 57.3
      TURNING CIRCLE 41.3 ft
      CURB WEIGHT 4384 lb
      WEIGHT DIST., F/R 52/48 %
      SEATING CAPACITY 5
      HEADROOM, F/R 40.5/38.3 in
      LEGROOM, F/R 41.4/36.1 in
      SHOULDER ROOM, F/R 58.3/56.2 in
      CARGO VOLUME 14.0 cu ft
      TEST DATA
      ACCELERATION TO MPH
      0-30 1.5 sec
      0-40 2.2
      0-50 2.9
      0-60 3.7
      0-70 4.7
      0-80 5.8
      0-90 7.0
      0-100 8.4
      PASSING, 45-65 MPH 1.6
      QUARTER MILE 11.9 sec @ 120.3 mph
      BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 110 ft
      LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.94 g (avg)
      MT FIGURE EIGHT 24.9 sec @ 0.81 g (avg)
      TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 1500 rpm
      CONSUMER INFO
      BASE PRICE $95,000 (est)
      PRICE AS TESTED $105,000 (est)
      STABILITY/TRACTION CONTROL Yes/Yes
      AIRBAGS Dual front, front side, f/r curtain, front knee
      BASIC WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles
      POWERTRAIN WARRANTY 4 yrs/50,000 miles
      ROADSIDE ASSISTANCE 4 yrs/Unlimited
      FUEL CAPACITY 21.1 gal
      EPA CITY/HWY ECON 15/22 mpg (est)
      ENERGY CONS., CITY/HWY 225/153 kW-hrs/100 miles (est)
      CO2 EMISSIONS 1.11 lb/mile (est)
      RECOMMENDED FUEL Unleaded premium



      This article was originally published in forum thread: Motor Trend's First Test of 2013 BMW M5 started by flipm3 View original post
      Comments 50 Comments
      1. ultimateendz's Avatar
        ultimateendz -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge


        And? Since when is an M car about torque down low? What, now the best cars are ones with positive displacement superchargers because their torque delivery is even better and more rapid than the M5's? If so, we would all have CTS-V's.
        im not opposed to that idea....assimilate!!!...lol
      1. Jimefam's Avatar
        Jimefam -
        Lol are u kidding sticky? There isn't a thing those older M5's did better than this one. And sorry to burst your bubble but this isnt a sportscar it's a sporty luxury sedan. Oh and the E63 is ugggglllyy.
      1. flipm3's Avatar
        flipm3 -
        The reason why BMW M has always won me over compared to MB AMG was simply driving experience. It might not have to be the fastest in a straight line or the fastest track time or the most horsepower, but when I want to buy a car, I want to enjoy every aspect of it. To me personally, I feel like that's what I experience with my current M3s. I'm pretty sure the C32 or C63 counterpart were significantly faster on the highway or had nicer interiors, but they really didn't give back to me as a driver.

        What I love about BMW M cars is that they have balance and they do everything equally well. No matter how I use the car, it's just fun...

        I'm not going to lie, at the Chicago Auto Show this year, the one car that really tickled my fancy was the E63 Estate with some sort of matte silver Designo paint. I am looking forward to driving both cars in the near future and to see what fits me best. I like that AMG is upping their game a lot recently because I hope that it will push BMW M to not be complacent with their cars.

        Thanks for making this an article Sticky Click here to enlarge
      1. Sorena's Avatar
        Sorena -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Show me.
        The video description.
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        One of the best features of the forum I would say.
        Wait, how do you do that? For multi quoting someone's post what i do is copy pasting parts and then manually quoting.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        I posted a CLS63 and F10M5 comparison not too long ago where both cars were said to go into limp mode on the first lap.
        I've never seen a test between these two cars except the latest issue of Car Magazine, didn't mention anything about limp mode.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        So it's a great motor when it isn't being hampered by software? No kidding. But you just said it has no torque. Inconsistency? Of course a low horsepower mode won't feel good, uh, it's because it is being artificially limited.
        I said it has no torque in lower RPM's which is right IN CITY DRIVING even in M Sport. I know what i'm saying cuz i'm the one who drive in city with not just one S85 but two.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        And? Since when is an M car about torque down low? What, now the best cars are ones with positive displacement superchargers because their torque delivery is even better and more rapid than the M5's? If so, we would all have CTS-V's.
        It's the superior engine for an M5, a luxury super saloon. This the engine this car need not a 8300RPM V10. I'm not saying which is better, i'm saying which engine suits better that car.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Since when? Because BMW is now making this idiotic claim? The E39 M5 did everything well and didn't need a billion buttons changing every setting to do so. It was just an awesome super sedan, it wasn't pretending to be multiple things. And it never needed to fake its engine noise...
        I don't disagree.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        It's gotten fat and lazy. BMW says the new turbo motors don't respond like the old ones. I don't care how much you like the torque, it is not as sharp as a car as the E60 M5 and it makes nowhere near the statement the E39 M5 did.
        BMW talks BS too much recently. However i just suggest to test one yourself to see what i'm talking. And it's quite sharp, the steering is actually better than the previous one. It's heavier and you can feel the weight though.
      1. M3_WC's Avatar
        M3_WC -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        The video description.
        The video is up on Evo's youtube channel.

        It does not say it has the Perf. package in the desription.

        From looking at the video, I don't think it does either. I don't see the giant red calipers that come with the PP.
      1. M3_WC's Avatar
        M3_WC -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by flipm3 Click here to enlarge
        The reason why BMW M has always won me over compared to MB AMG was simply driving experience. It might not have to be the fastest in a straight line or the fastest track time or the most horsepower, but when I want to buy a car, I want to enjoy every aspect of it. To me personally, I feel like that's what I experience with my current M3s. I'm pretty sure the C32 or C63 counterpart were significantly faster on the highway or had nicer interiors, but they really didn't give back to me as a driver.
        Here is the thing...the drivers car argument is starting not to apply with the M5 growing in size and weight. As it is losing in the handling aspect to the now lighter E63. The only argument I really see BMW lovers hanging on to, is the manual vs automatic. Otherwise the cars are more even than ever, in some instances the E63 wins outs.

        For example AutoCar's comparo: http://f10.m5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=594332

        Quotes like this make you think much harder about the E63:
        What's not in doubt is the extra handling percision of the Mercedes, or the greater sense of agility it displays when you really start to lean on it through a quick corner.
        The way the M5 controls its mass during direction change is downright disturbing in isolation - but at no time does it feel as sharp as the E63...
      1. M3_WC's Avatar
        M3_WC -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Who had the review that mentioned it went into limp mode? As did the CLS it was compared against. We expect it from the Benz. That is what BMW has become with M now, AMG.
        That was CarMag New Zealand.

        Dragrace. The M5 gets the jump, but the CLS63 runs it down and takes the win.

      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Jimefam Click here to enlarge
        Lol are u kidding sticky? There isn't a thing those older M5's did better than this one. And sorry to burst your bubble but this isnt a sportscar it's a sporty luxury sedan. Oh and the E63 is ugggglllyy.
        Well for one their engines sounded better hah. Secondly, they weighed far less.

        What bubble? I have been saying sport sedan. Try reading what I write, I'm not the one claiming it is a sports car.

        The E63 is a 6 series convertible. Please learn your chassis codes.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by flipm3 Click here to enlarge
        The reason why BMW M has always won me over compared to MB AMG was simply driving experience. It might not have to be the fastest in a straight line or the fastest track time or the most horsepower, but when I want to buy a car, I want to enjoy every aspect of it. To me personally, I feel like that's what I experience with my current M3s. I'm pretty sure the C32 or C63 counterpart were significantly faster on the highway or had nicer interiors, but they really didn't give back to me as a driver.
        Agree with everything except the M cars offered all this plus matched the AMG's and even beat them in the straightline. For the record, I made a video back in the day beating a C32 AMG as those guys thought their cars were sooo much faster. M used to do it all.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
        That was CarMag New Zealand.
        There we go, thank you.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by M3_WC Click here to enlarge
        The video is up on Evo's youtube channel.

        It does not say it has the Perf. package in the desription.

        From looking at the video, I don't think it does either. I don't see the giant red calipers that come with the PP.
        And there we go again.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        Wait, how do you do that? For multi quoting someone's post what i do is copy pasting parts and then manually quoting.
        Heh, you just highlight text and click quote.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        I've never seen a test between these two cars except the latest issue of Car Magazine, didn't mention anything about limp mode.
        See the previous posts.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        I said it has no torque in lower RPM's which is right IN CITY DRIVING even in M Sport. I know what i'm saying cuz i'm the one who drive in city with not just one S85 but two.
        It has plenty of torque in its full mode. It has a very flat curve with 85% of its torque available as early as 1800 rpm or so. So, sorry, not buying what you are saying especially considering the M3 has less torque and it moved just fine out of first gear. You act like it's a Honda 1.6 liter or something.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        It's the superior engine for an M5, a luxury super saloon. This the engine this car need not a 8300RPM V10. I'm not saying which is better, i'm saying which engine suits better that car.
        It doesn't need an 8300 rpm V10? No kidding, that is what made the M5 badass. It was so over the top awesome and a race motor. Nobody had anything like it.

        Oh, a twin turbo V8 you say? Who doesn't have one? M had a tradition of high revving race motors for a reason.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        I don't disagree.
        You can't.

        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sorena Click here to enlarge
        It's heavier and you can feel the weight though.
        Ohhhh, no kidding.
      1. flipm3's Avatar
        flipm3 -
        Another article, although not in English, to stir up the pot Click here to enlarge

        http://f10.m5post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=662077


        1st place: BMW M5 F10



        • Tyres: Michelin Pilot Super Sport
        • Weight: 1930 kg
        • 0-100 km/h: 3,9 s
        • 0-200 km/h: 11,8 s
        • Quarter mile: 11,98 s
        • Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 3,9 s
        • Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,7 m


        2nd place: Cadillac CTS-V Automatic


        • Tyres: Michelin Pilot Sport PS2
        • Weight: 1980 kg
        • 0-100 km/h: 4,3 s
        • 0-200 km/h: 14,1 s
        • Quarter mile: 12,49 s
        • Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 6,1 s
        • Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,4 m


        3rd place: Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG Performance Package


        • Tyres: Continental SportContact 5P
        • Weight: 1929 kg
        • 0-100 km/h: 4,1 s
        • 0-200 km/h: 12,6 s
        • Quarter mile: 12,07 s
        • Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 4,6 s
        • Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 34,6 m


        4th place: Jaguar XFR


        • Tyres: Dunlop SP Sportmaxx J
        • Weight: 1970 kg
        • 0-100 km/h: 4,5 s
        • 0-200 km/h: 14,4 s
        • Quarter mile: 12,54 s
        • Flexibility (80-120 km/h) in 5th gear: 6,0 s
        • Braking (100-0 km/h), warm: 35,6 m


        Sachsenring-tracktimes:
        1:37,82 min - Porsche Panamera Turbo S
        1:38,16 min - Porsche Panamera Turbo
        1:38,66 min - BMW M5 F10
        1:40,86 min - Cadillac CTS-V Automatic
        1:41,00 min - Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG PP (best is 1:40,6 min)
        1:43,75 min - Jaguar XFR
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        ^ Should be in separate thread, and I hate linking to bimmerpost.

        Just copy / paste.
      1. Blitz535i's Avatar
        Blitz535i -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        It doesn't need an 8300 rpm V10? No kidding, that is what made the M5 badass. It was so over the top awesome and a race motor. Nobody had anything like it.
        Slightly OT, but where in your opinion does the S85 rank historically among M engines? Throw all the technical stuff out (if that's possible) and just rank the engine against other M mills for that "awesome-ness" factor. If you had to pick the 3 best M engines ever produced, would the S85 be among them?
      1. hworang00's Avatar
        hworang00 -
        I'm surprised at the car...it's a quick bastard...we'll see how it sells Click here to enlarge
      1. Jimefam's Avatar
        Jimefam -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
        Well for one their engines sounded better hah. Secondly, they weighed far less.What bubble? I have been saying sport sedan. Try reading what I write, I'm not the one claiming it is a sports car.The E63 is a 6 series convertible. Please learn your chassis codes.
        Yes the engine sounded better and yes they weighed less and yes those are both good things, however what I meant was performance wise the new M5 I'm sure is superior to it's predecessors and at the end of the day that is the most important thing(not the only thing though). What I meant is you have to understand why it's being turbo's and adding weight. First it must accomplish the luxury sedan portion and Sorena is right the previous M5 was not the greatest DD sedan although a very fun car for short periods of time(but for that u get an M3 which is better still). Now it has gobs of low end power and a much better looking interior and exterior with more luxury and a better ride. Unfortunately nothing is free and those things costs in terms of weight but for 99% of M5 buyers it's worth the trade off. I had the choice to buy an older M5 or my 550i for close to the same $ and chose the 550i and would have done so even if the M5 was 5k cheaper, not because the 550 is the better sports car but it's a better sports sedan. Oh and I meant the MB E63 not the chassis code learn to keep up lol.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Blitz535i Click here to enlarge
        Slightly OT, but where in your opinion does the S85 rank historically among M engines? Throw all the technical stuff out (if that's possible) and just rank the engine against other M mills for that "awesome-ness" factor. If you had to pick the 3 best M engines ever produced, would the S85 be among them?
        I'd put it towards the top. I may do a ranking of M motors article would be cool.

        Would it be top 3? Yes.
      1. BK63AMG's Avatar
        BK63AMG -
        This car is a beast...4000+lb sedan running sub-12 sec 1/4s is insane by any measure.
      1. Sticky's Avatar
        Sticky -
        Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by BK63AMG Click here to enlarge
        This car is a beast...4000+lb sedan running sub-12 sec 1/4s is insane by any measure.
        Even in the post 2013 GT500 and GTR world? And considering the previous M5 already ran low 12's in the ~115 range without turbos?